How much longer until NU is consistently in the conversation for an NC?

[Axl_sued_me]

In your opinion?

[Enhance]

As soon as they start beating the teams they should beat (consistently) and beat teams in big games (for example, beating either VaTech or Oklahoma this year) will put them in the conversation. They also need to beat teams well, and not struggle through a season against teams at the bottom of the conference or against weak non-conference games like they did against San Jose State last year.

 

Honestly, if Nebraska goes through the season and beats VaTech and makes it to the Oklahoma game unbeaten, there will be some discussion of them going to the NC game. Oklahoma is our biggest hurdle this year.

 

But for a consistent year in and year out Nebraska NC discussion, refer to the first paragraph.

[95huskers]

As soon as they start beating the teams they should beat (consistently) and beat teams in big games (for example, beating either VaTech or Oklahoma this year) will put them in the conversation. They also need to beat teams well, and not struggle through a season against teams at the bottom of the conference or against weak non-conference games like they did against San Jose State last year.

 

Honestly, if Nebraska goes through the season and beats VaTech and makes it to the Oklahoma game unbeaten, there will be some discussion of them going to the NC game. Oklahoma is our biggest hurdle this year.

 

But for a consistent year in and year out Nebraska NC discussion, refer to the first paragraph.

 

 

They replayed the game from ou 08 last night on espnu and athleticly we are not on the same page as them... doesnt mean we cant beat them just that we have to play above and beyond our capabilities and pray for a few mistakes from ou. we didnt even come close last year to put pressure on the qb and that will be a must in order to give us a chance. i think the game will be much better than last year but i dont see us winning.. just sipping on vodka koolaid hoping for a win! haha

[knapplc]

Agreed. There is a clear disparity between Oklahoma/Texas and the players we've got now. Whether that's pure athletic ability or coaching or some combination of the two I don't know, but we have a long way to go before we're in their league again.

[Axl_sued_me]

Agreed. There is a clear disparity between Oklahoma/Texas and the players we've got now. Whether that's pure athletic ability or coaching or some combination of the two I don't know, but we have a long way to go before we're in their league again.

 

 

How long will it be until Nebraska can narrow that disparity? Really, we have not been able to match up to top teams athletically long before Bill Callahan i.e. 2002 Rose Bowl.

[Igetbored216]

Honestly, if Nebraska goes through the season and beats VaTech and makes it to the Oklahoma game unbeaten, there will be some discussion of them going to the NC game. Oklahoma is our biggest hurdle this year.

 

As of right now, I think VT will be bigger challenge than Oklahoma this year for the following reasons:

 

- Oklahoma replaces just about their entire o-line. Granted they have been known for their o-line, but as of right now, this is a pretty big question mark.

 

- Kind of linked to the first, but Sam Bradford does not throw well under pressure. He did not take many sacks at all last year behind an above average offensive line. When he was pressured, his performance suffered. My point: Bradford, as of last year's Florida game, does not handle pressure well.

 

-Taylor's QB play will be much improved this year and this type of QB has historically given the Pelini D problems.

 

- VT's WRs will be much more experienced this year and will have a great running game behind an experienced o-line. Bottom line: VT's offense is going to worry me alot more this year then it did last year.

 

- VT is on the road (VT has a ridiculous record at home - luckily it's not a night game, but still); Oklahoma is at home this year.

 

My thought process may change when I see Oklahoma and VT in action, but as of right now, this is where I sit.

[knapplc]

How long will it be until Nebraska can narrow that disparity? Really, we have not been able to match up to top teams athletically long before Bill Callahan i.e. 2002 Rose Bowl.

It could be as early as this year or it could be never. It's impossible to answer that question. We have a whole bunch of new athletes taking the field this year who could be the second coming of the 95 team or they could all fall flat. Who can tell until we watch them play the game?

 

In a really generic way of answering this, I would say the fastest a coach could turn a program around, starting from what amounts to an empty cupboard, would be three years. By his third year he'll have his players playing with enough of his coaching to get them going in the right direction. But that presumes that the players are all exactly what he wanted (as in, not just bodies to fill spots), and that he's able to coach them up, keep them injury-free, and that fluke/weird things don't conspire against them.

 

The 1997 MNC owes everything to that freaky kick-pass at Missouri. Without that play, probably the most fluky in Husker history, we don't win that title. Luck is a non-quantifiable factor.

[RedDenver]

B12 champ is in the conversation automatically. So to be consistently in the MNC conversation, we need to consistently be in the conversation to win the B12. To do that, IMO, we need to win the north most years and start playing all the south teams tough with some wins over UT and OU. We don't have to win the conference every year, just be in the pool of teams considered to have a good chance to do so.

[skerfan1705]

Two years. With no major caoching changes we can be a team that consistantly challenges for the National Championship in 2011.

 

-We may challenge for the Big 12 this year...but we are no Oklahoma/Texas/USC/Florida

 

 

But we are getting there!

 

GO BIG RED!

[robsker]

How long will it be until Nebraska can narrow that disparity? Really, we have not been able to match up to top teams athletically long before Bill Callahan i.e. 2002 Rose Bowl.

It could be as early as this year or it could be never. It's impossible to answer that question. We have a whole bunch of new athletes taking the field this year who could be the second coming of the 95 team or they could all fall flat. Who can tell until we watch them play the game?

 

In a really generic way of answering this, I would say the fastest a coach could turn a program around, starting from what amounts to an empty cupboard, would be three years. By his third year he'll have his players playing with enough of his coaching to get them going in the right direction. But that presumes that the players are all exactly what he wanted (as in, not just bodies to fill spots), and that he's able to coach them up, keep them injury-free, and that fluke/weird things don't conspire against them.

 

The 1997 MNC owes everything to that freaky kick-pass at Missouri. Without that play, probably the most fluky in Husker history, we don't win that title. Luck is a non-quantifiable factor.

 

This is an excellent response --- both in content and in prose. Well done.

 

I'd have to agree that consistent MNC conversation including NU could start this year (though it seems unlikely) or could be never (also unlikely as never is a long time!). The earliest Pelini could be expected to have us there would be really in two years --- though if we are not there two years from now that would in no way mean that the "Pelini Experiment" has been a failure or is even behind schedule --- assuming some sort of progress is being made.

 

I'd ask instead how long before NU is a consistent bowl team and a consistent top 25 team? This could have its start next year and have consistency established from there and move forward. Or not. It's a tossup. Might still be a year away from a season ending ranking.

 

The next question then would be how long before we seriously challenge for a BCS bowl? That will not likely be next year --- but might be something possible in a few years.

 

A team that has been non-competitive for the past 6-7 years, has been un-ranked far more often than not during that time period and has no quality victories over a big program in that time period has no real legitimate basis to even think of being in MNC talk.

 

Step-by-step. First NU needs to consistently be ranked (which it has not yet shown). Then it must have quality wins (which is not yet the case). Then NU has to be a legit BCS bowl contender (which is as well not yet the case).

 

MNC talk that is consistent and legitimate is so far from where NU is right now that one cannot really say much about timeline.

 

One indicator of approach to any of these things is recruiting. And recruiting is incredibly tough to evaluate. So predicting anything concretely is difficult. My notion at this point is that recruiting is still not approaching that of the top 10-12 programs. Who knows though --- you can wait it out and see and that is about it.

 

All this said, NU is headed in the right direction.... but the path is very, very long indeed. At least 15 - 20 programs are better perched than NU right now to be a consistent MNC contender in the foreseeable future. Unless the Pelini factor is a trump card that will play out over time in a special way. Lets hope.... the Pelini Experiment has just begun. Lets talk on this issue again in two years. things will be clearer then. Right now it would be blind guessing.

[Hunter94]

look, this is a loaded question with no easy answer. winning begets better recruits, better recruits begets winning...honestley we are a looong way from pressing the top 10 in the country. until we start recruiting top 10 classes, we won't be a consistent top 10 team.

from there it is still a looong way to a NC....reality, what a concept.

[HuskerJen]

How much longer until NU is consistently in the conversation for an NC?

 

Starting in '10...count on it.

 

There are only two teams on the schedule this year, Virginia Tech and Oklahoma, where there is even a remote possibility of facing superior talent. I don't buy it personally, but I can see how someone could think that.

 

All the other teams on our schedule we are vastly superior to or on par with.

[Hunter94]

How much longer until NU is consistently in the conversation for an NC?

 

Starting in '10...count on it.

 

There are only two teams on the schedule this year, Virginia Tech and Oklahoma, where there is even a remote possibility of facing superior talent. I don't buy it personally, but I can see how someone could think that.

 

All the other teams on our schedule we are vastly superior to or on par with.

 

 

 

consistently?? that needs defining and then it needs to be proven....we have done neither so far.

[UGAHusker]

How much longer until NU is consistently in the conversation for an NC?

 

Starting in '10...count on it.

 

There are only two teams on the schedule this year, Virginia Tech and Oklahoma, where there is even a remote possibility of facing superior talent. I don't buy it personally, but I can see how someone could think that.

 

All the other teams on our schedule we are vastly superior to or on par with.

 

Something fishy is up. Agreeing with Jen twice in 3 days. The 2010 schedule plays out so well, and if you look at some of the players that the top teams we play will lose (Texas, Okie State, Kansas) we should definetly have a chance in all of them. Obviously, the experience that our current players will gain will be tremendous as well along with another year of "the system".

[HuskerJen]

Something fishy is up. Agreeing with Jen twice in 3 days.

 

Is agreeing with me really that bad?